We agree porn is bad, but should it be banned?

[BoyGenius]

It’s already illegal in Federal law, just as pot is illegal under Federal law. The laws have not changed. The government just ignores/puts it’s back to enforcing the laws as it does turn it’s back to abortion mills which constitute murder of an unborn human life.

 

[Elf01]

His point is valid.

Your argument could be used to justify getting rid of any law as they have all been broken at some point otherwise we would have nobody in prison.

 

[michaelArc]

Interesting, I did not know that. I’m not familiar with American laws.

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

Where are you getting that pornography is illegal under federal law? That’s simply not true.

 

[Spyridon]

There’s no way to put the “genie back in the bottle” now. If porn was going to have been banned, it would have had to have been done in pre-internet days. There’s no stopping it now.

 

[Aulef]

Yes, it should

 

[mythbuster1]

The difficulty in banning pornography is defining what constitutes pornography. People do have a right to criminal statutes being clear enough for them to tell if they’re in compliance with the law or not, and pornographers are notorious for obeying the letter of the law while subverting the spirit thereof.

 

[AdamP88]

Regulation doesn’t necessarily lead to a dystopian future.
Some laws are not enforced with the full power of the law. They only exist as a statement that X behaviour is not acceptable in this society.

In general, I think that sexual sins can’t be legislated for. But in the case of pornography, how is it really different to prostitution? And prostitution is generally illegal.

 

[pnewton]

The Church has learned from that… heresy and rejecting Christ remain grave sins, but the Church no longer encourages states to make matters of faith illegal.

Making matter of morals that affect the good of society illegal is still the only purpose of even having a government, as opposed to anarchy. That is why prostitution, drugs, child pornography, etc. are illegal.

Those who say it should not be illegal, can you think of an argument that would not also hold for child pornography or bestiality?

I do think an outright ban may not be the best way to restrict it, but I can think of several good ideas, like restricting in on the internet for countries in the United States and those countries that trade with the United States, and for sale in stores.

 

[Lea101]

I want it to be strictly regulated/banned/whatever not really for the sake of its potential viewers (just don’t watch it…) but more so for the sake of the exploited actresses/actors in the industry. There should be some way to make sure that they are protected?

 

[exnihilo]

but because the consequences of enforcing such a law seem to have the potential for enabling insane levels of tyranny just by the tools it requires for enforcement being in government’s hands and that we can just disincentivize it by educating people on what it does, building support networks, etc.

It isn’t tyrannical to ban child porn? So how would it be tyrannical to ban all porn? If anything it is more tyrannical to ban child porn because who can prove how old the people are in the film? The government can say a completely digital creation of ‘child porn’ is a crime. Meaning you can have child porn involving no children or real people.

Banning porn isn’t practical. Any attempt to do so will immediately be struck down by the court.

Probably, but the legal tradition in the US says obscene material can be prohibited. Striking down a ban would be yet another departure from the rule of law.

 

[exnihilo]

Porn is still unlawful by federal law. So yeah, it’s unlawful. The government has turned it’s back just as it does every time an abortion mill arises. And does nothing to stop it.

The powers that control the state clearly want pornography. It isn’t hard to contain. They spend huge resources going after far less dangerous things.

 

[exnihilo]

The constitution makes it legal in America.

Not true. Obscene material is not and has never been allowed.

Perhaps some form of regulations could be a solution. For instance, all porn sites must be registered under .xxx URL. Declare them a public health risk, tax them like cigarettes and fine them heavily if they breach the rules. A large portion of the taxation can go towards campaigns, education and addiction support.

This would be easy. Force all porn to .xxx and require all internet providers to by default block the .xxx domains. That way you have to opt into the content. It is so easy the fact they don’t do this tells you the evil powers that control us want pron to be widespread.

The difficulty in banning pornography is defining what constitutes pornography. People do have a right to criminal statutes being clear enough for them to tell if they’re in compliance with the law or not, and pornographers are notorious for obeying the letter of the law while subverting the spirit thereof.

It isn’t difficult at all. Real or simulated sex acts are porn. Nudity isn’t porn. Two nude people nowhere near each other isn’t porn. We don’t have a problem defining child porn.

 

[Vico]

Prior to Vatican II, for many long centuries, the Church opposed freedom of religion. She pushed Catholic states to crack down on heresy and non-Christian religions to promote unity of faith. Didn’t work out so great. The Church has learned from that… heresy and rejecting Christ remain grave sins, but the Church no longer encourages states to make matters of faith illegal.

Actually it does since what is sin is a matter of faith not relative morality or merely ethics. Examples: murder, abortion, contraception (other than NFP), homosexual marriage.

 

[Spyridon]

but more so for the sake of the exploited actresses/actors in the industry. There should be some way to make sure that they are protected?

What about all the amateurs who do it for free though?

I always hear this argument, but amateur porn is extremely popular as well.

 

[Lea101]

I know what you mean. I keep accidentally coming across them on social media.

I don’t know how to ensure that these people are not being exploited/coerced, to be honest.

 

[PetraG]

i think pornagraphy should absolutely be banned

but it never will’ve been

it is a billion dollar industry; makes conventional hollyweed look like pikers

The problem is that there is real art that depicts people who are nude and in sexual situations. The line between pornography–that is, work intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings–and art is a moveable border. In the borderland between art and porn, the exact placement of the dividing line depends as much on the viewer as on the artist–or purveyor, because let’s face it: a lot of porn is nothing remotely like “art,” since there is no emotional investment going into it or coming from it.

[Aside: It could be argued that the desensitizing power of pornography manufactured to be erotic stimulation divorced from all other human emotions is actually “anti-art,” as it works to deaden the soul rather than to elevate it.]

As for pornography addiction, it is difficult to say how to combat it, just as it is difficult to say how to combat drug addiction. What does not work is banning these things without any other intervention with regards to those tempted to indulge in these harmful and too-often enslaving habits.

 

[twf]

Sorry, I meant specifically one’s faith or beliefs are no longer legally regulated.

 

[Babinicz]

Its good excuse to a sin that you admire the “artistic beauty of naked women”.
Maybe healthy men who hasnt ever had a problem with porn can look at these.

But its a fact that porn destroys your brain for a long time.

 

[exnihilo]

The problem is that there is real art that depicts people who are nude and in sexual situations. The line between pornography–that is, work intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings–and art is a moveable border. In the borderland between art and porn, the exact placement of the dividing line depends as much on the viewer as on the artist–or purveyor, because let’s face it: a lot of porn is nothing remotely like “art,” since there is no emotional investment going into it or coming from it.

What is an example of real art that depicts people nude in sexual situations?

The Church doesn’t seem to define pornography subjectively based on intent or perception. It defines porn as real or simulated sex. That is very easy to identify.